Skip to main content
Glama
olgasafonova

mediawiki-mcp-server

by olgasafonova
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Go
Hybrid

mediawiki_compare_revisions

Read-only

Compare two MediaWiki revisions to see exactly what changed, showing additions and deletions in an HTML diff for version-to-version review.

Instructions

Compare two revisions and show the diff.

USE WHEN: User asks "what changed between versions", "show the diff", "compare old and new".

NOT FOR: Just listing revisions (use mediawiki_get_revisions). Not for comparing a topic across pages (use mediawiki_compare_topic).

PARAMETERS:

  • from_rev: Source revision ID, OR

  • from_title: Source page title (uses latest revision)

  • to_rev: Target revision ID, OR

  • to_title: Target page title

RETURNS: HTML-formatted diff showing additions (green) and deletions (red).

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
to_revNoTarget revision ID
from_revNoSource revision ID
to_titleNoTarget page title (uses latest revision)
rationaleNoOptional one-sentence explanation of why you are calling this tool. Used for audit trails when present.
from_titleNoSource page title (uses latest revision)

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
diffYes
to_userNo
to_revidYes
to_titleYes
from_userNo
from_revidYes
from_titleYes
to_timestampNo
from_timestampNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv1.31.0
    • addedInput schema / properties / rationale
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Optional one-sentence explanation of why you are calling this tool. Used for audit trails when present.",
+  "type": "string"
+}
  2. First observed

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior4/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint/openWorldHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds value beyond them by disclosing the return format (HTML diff with green additions/red deletions) and the OR-based revision/title resolution, but it doesn't mention the rationale audit-trail behavior or any rate/limit context.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Header-labeled blocks (USE WHEN, NOT FOR, PARAMETERS, RETURNS) front-load the purpose and the routing decision. Every sentence carries information; no filler.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

With an output schema present, the return format need not be spelled out, yet the description still summarizes it briefly. Combined with full schema coverage and annotations, an agent has everything needed to select and invoke the tool correctly.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds the OR-combinatorics between from_rev/from_title and to_rev/to_title, which the flat schema does not express as a constraint, giving the agent the either/or selection model not obvious from additionalProperties=false.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb+resource+output: 'Compare two revisions and show the diff.' The NOT FOR clause explicitly distinguishes it from mediawiki_get_revisions and mediawiki_compare_topic, so an agent can route without opening any schema.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Gives explicit USE WHEN phrases ('what changed between versions', 'show the diff') and NOT FOR exclusions that name the correct alternative tools for both near-miss cases (listing revisions, cross-page topic comparison). Nothing is left to inference.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Deploy Server

Other Tools